Ottawa Rapid Transit Network developments

[Franky]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

The presented project IS automated. All the numbers show that the core line will need to be fully automated LRT to actually achieve the planned numbers . The only reason that they're not building light metro is because of the suburbs' extensions which would be costlier to build.

The thing is that the difference in operating costs' savings was never analysed versus the cost of building a full fledge light metro through the suburbs, or to have a high frequency light metro with smaller stations compared to LRT.

They are partly automated, they require drivers because not all routes are segregated - all of the expense, but not all of the benefits. A cheaply elevated and easily routed system like Urbanaut means a completely segregated system won't break the bank. It also means higher peak time frequencies so smaller trains and stations are needed. Light metro would far exceed Ottawa's needs.

[RTWAP]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

It's not like running it on surface will be free. You can't simply strike off 600-700 million off the balance sheet because you're eliminating the tunnel. I bet more than $300 million would have to be spent downtown on surface track, stations, signalling, bridge reinforcements and road rebuilding. The tunnel becomes a no-brainer, for $300 million or so more, we get a system that is unimpeded by surface traffic. Someone remind me again what is being spent on Baseline station right now?

But we also save the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent to reroute buses off the transitway between bayview and tunney's. That money is a huge waste. I'd rather see that money go into permanent infrastructure (the secondary LRT line) that provides a benefit now, and provides ongoing benefits and redundancy later.

I have absolutely no desire to attempt to build a full-scale high capacity surface LRT downtown. It would be a total waste. But a smaller scale line would be a valuable part of the system for a long time.

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

That's great and all... but then how much of the "savings" get eaten up in redesigning everything else to now run through a non-tunnel, and in designing the rest of the system that constitutes "more surface rail"?

And how much time does that buy before grade separation, whether tunnel, el, aerial tube, or magic happy carpet, is required anyway?

I wouldn't redesign. The tunnel design is fine. It needs to happen in 10-15 years. I'm just talking about juggling the phases so that the tunnel and western BRT conversion happens after the western secondary LRT. All the same things get built, but we avoid paying hundreds of millions to reroute the bus traffic while the BRT is converted to LRT.

Note, there is an assumption built into my suggestion that isn't a sure thing. I'm assuming the LRT route will run along the BRT to Dominion and then hop over to the Byron tramway or alongside Richmond road (hopefully the former). I don't want a Ottawa River Parkway routing. And if the Carling routing is selected then it's a problem because you do build an affordable secondary LRT on Carling and then convert it to primary LRT, which would be disruptive and expensive.

It's crazy that we don't know the route this is supposed to follow. Those decisions could be made at any time, and they affect what they're doing right now.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Franky

They are partly automated, they require drivers because not all routes are segregated - all of the expense, but not all of the benefits. A cheaply elevated and easily routed system like Urbanaut means a completely segregated system won't break the bank. It also means higher peak time frequencies so smaller trains and stations are needed. Light metro would far exceed Ottawa's needs.

An elevated structure now costs less per km than an at grade structure that requires reconstruction. There is no point for the lack of segregation AT ALL.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Franky

...A cheaply elevated and easily routed system like Urbanaut means a completely segregated system won't break the bank. It also means higher peak time frequencies so smaller trains and stations are needed. Light metro would far exceed Ottawa's needs.

Monorails seem to come up in transit discussions in many cities (and also in one of the best Simpson's episodes of all time) but outside of Japan they only seem to be used in amusement parks and other tourist settings. I suspect capacity is an issue, the Las Vegas Monorail only carries 22k passengers a day (which isn't much more than the existing o-train). I don't think the Urbanaut technology is actually in full use anywhere, there is a tourist line under construction in Korea, but certainly no use as the backbone of the transit system in a major city.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

An elevated structure now costs less per km than an at grade structure that requires reconstruction. There is no point for the lack of segregation AT ALL.

It depends what you mean by reconstruction - the big variable is what utilities are under the road.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by RTWAP

I wouldn't redesign.

I'm pretty sure you would have to redesign something if you postpone the tunnel to a later date; the trains aren't going to fly from Lees to Lebreton.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Monorails seem to come up in transit discussions in many cities (and also in one of the best Simpson's episodes of all time) but outside of Japan they only seem to be used in amusement parks and other tourist settings. I suspect capacity is an issue, the Las Vegas Monorail only carries 22k passengers a day (which isn't much more than the existing o-train). I don't think the Urbanaut technology is actually in full use anywhere, there is a tourist line under construction in Korea, but certainly no use as the backbone of the transit system in a major city.

Urbanaut can also run at grade or in tunnels. I think the point of the Simpson's episode is a general boondoggle which LRT has qualified for in some places, but as for the capacity issue, BRT moves a lot of people using "only buses" and cars are very small compared to a train, but move the majority of people around. Yes, it's innovative and potentially revolutionary. Ottawa could be strategically positioned to advance and profit from the technology.

We can continue this in "The future of Ottawa's Transit" thread if you are interested in new ideas.

[Franky]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

An elevated structure now costs less per km than an at grade structure that requires reconstruction. There is no point for the lack of segregation AT ALL.

So we agree on the benefits of automated and segregated train lines.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Franky

So we agree on the benefits of automated and segregated train lines.

Vancouver has the lowest operating costs in North America with their SkyTrain, and that's with midget trains with average ridership.

[RTWAP]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I'm pretty sure you would have to redesign something if you postpone the tunnel to a later date; the trains aren't going to fly from Lees to Lebreton.

Well obviously. But I wouldn't discard the current design. It's fine for the primary LRT corridor. I would just speed up the design for the secondary LRT.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Speaking of LRT, am I the only one who is worried that council will still find a way to screw this up and make it more expensive than it needs to be? The $600 Million comes with the condition that the tunnel be built, but some councilors and mayoral candidates say that the tunnel is far from being a done deal. And knowing our councilors, they probably won't stop and just keep going and try to get rid of the tunnel regardless.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

Speaking of LRT, am I the only one who is worried that council will still find a way to screw this up and make it more expensive than it needs to be? The $600 Million comes with the condition that the tunnel be built, but some councilors and mayoral candidates say that the tunnel is far from being a done deal. And knowing our councilors, they probably won't stop and just keep going and try to get rid of the tunnel regardless.

I think your worry may be too modest - I remain to be convinced that the thing will be built at all, at least under the current leadership.

[lrt's friend]

So, it sounds like O'Brien and Cullen want to make this work no matter what. If costs escalate (this could be from inflation or rising commodity prices alone), does this mean that the city has to take on a lot of debt or does it mean we are going cut the proposed line further? Either way, what do we end up with? In the former case, we may have to sacrifice other transit projects including Phase 2 of our LRT project for a number of years. In the latter case, do we end up with a Bayview to St. Laurent LRT line with a connection to the maintenance yard?

[lrt's friend]

It's not like running it on surface will be free. You can't simply strike off 600-700 million off the balance sheet because you're eliminating the tunnel. I bet more than $300 million would have to be spent downtown on surface track, stations, signalling, bridge reinforcements and road rebuilding. The tunnel becomes a no-brainer, for $300 million or so more, we get a system that is unimpeded by surface traffic. Someone remind me again what is being spent on Baseline station right now?

Let's remember that the 600 to 700 million for the tunnel does not include the rail infrastructure which is priced separately. This does make a difference in this argument.

[Dado]

I've probably been keeping track of changes in costing as closely as anyone, and to be honest once the $2.1B figure came out I lost all ability to track it seriously.

As just one example, transitway conversion amounts to $540M of that figure. There's approximately 9 km of transitway to convert and coincidentally 9 stations to convert/build. So we can make a neat little assumption and lump in one station per km and divide that into the $540M for a total of $60M per km + station. Elsewhere I had seen that stations averaged $40M each, leaving $20M/km for conversion. Well the problem with that is that light rail infrastructure costs per km were running at around $8.25M/km back in April 2008 before contingencies and the stations themselves were usually estimated in the $1-5M range each. Throw in a few million per kilometre for non-infrastructure conversion costs and you're still well below $20M/km. Unless you have like 50% contingency. Except the $2.1B already includes $100M of contingency.

It's all about as clear as mud.

This is speculation, but I think they've seriously overestimated the cost of things like conversion and even the tunnels, while stations I'd say is the opposite. Those mined-out stations are going to keep billowing out of control cost-wise, and the various transfer stations keep rising in cost too. The failure to provide more detailed costings for the $2.1B (i.e. down to the same level of detail as provided in April 2008) is, as d_jeffrey has written, going to seriously impair our ability to get good bids since we're now expecting a cost blow out.

[Lakche]

Does the $600 million from the Federal Government come with a requirement that the tunnel be built?

I can't seem to find that in any of the news articles or the press release.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by Lakche

Does the $600 million from the Federal Government come with a requirement that the tunnel be built?

I can't seem to find that in any of the news articles or the press release.

No, nor do they care about exact routing.

[waterloowarrior]

west transitway connection open house 2 display boards
http://ottawa.ca/residents/public_co...2/oh_2_en.html

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by Lakche

Does the $600 million from the Federal Government come with a requirement that the tunnel be built?

I can't seem to find that in any of the news articles or the press release.

http://communities.canada.com/ottawa...ight-rail.aspx
http://communities.canada.com/ottawa...-flexible.aspx

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I think your worry may be too modest - I remain to be convinced that the thing will be built at all, at least under the current leadership.

The possibility doesn't go up, if recent polls are correct about the future leadership, either.

Honestly, a condition of being a city councillor, or at least a member of the transit committee, should be that you have to surrender your driver's license for a bus pass for the duration of your term.